Law of Contract 1
Law of Contract 1
Law of Contract 1
Faculty of Law
Sem 1 Law of Contract 1
Prepared by Judith Max A. Lecturer Faculty of Law Gulu University
The law of contract in Uganda is found in the contract Act, 2010 which also
provides for the application of the English law of contract.
Sir William Anson in his book principles of the law of contract defined a
contract as a; “Legally binding agreement made between two or more
person by which rights are acquired by one or more to act or
forbearances on the part of the other or others”.
Their contractual right differs from a right as action in fort. The right of action
between the parties is right in persona which is available only against a
particular person or persons in contractual agreements, while tortuous right of
action is right in rem that is enforceable against all persons generally.
1
1
a) There must be an agreement composed of an offer by one person and
acceptance of that offer made by the other person.
b) The parties must have an intention to create legal relations because the law
does not enforce mere social engagement.
e) The contracting parties must consent to the terms of the contract of the
agreement made between them. Where there was no consent between the
parties, their contractual relationship may be vitiated by irregularities such
as fraud misrepresentation, mistake, duress or undue influence.
f) The contract must be legal. The contract must not be contrary to the law
and its performance must not be impossible. For instance, the contract to
walk to the moon is impossible.
NATURE OF CONTRACTS
1. Void contracts
This is considered as not a contract at all. Void contracts means there was
attempt to create contractual relationship but failed due to some material
defects. For instance absences of free will consent, consideration etc.
2
When the contract is void, the law does not recognize it and they are rendered
not binding on any party. Any property transferred under such contracts is
recoverable because the transferee has no legal right over it.
2. Voidable contracts
This is a contract that can be made voidable by one party at his or her option.
Voidable contracts exist with the right of repudiation vested in one party
attached to. Voidable contracts are contracts formed as a result of fraud,
duress, misrepresentation etc.
The main difference between void and voidable contract is that in voidable
contract, innocent parties acting in good faith may acquire under the contract
and lose their right to avoid it, while no such rights can be acquired under a
void contract.
3. Unenforceable contract
These are contract for the breach of which, the law attaches certain condition
on the remedy. All the essentials element of a contract may be present but the
agreement may not be enforceable due to the fact that the form required by the
law for their formation is not followed. This evidence may be acquirement from
the provision of law and therefore cannot be enforced until the defect is
rectified.
3
CLASSIFICATION OF CONTRACTS
There are four main types of contracts under the law of contract. These are:-
Promises made under seal are promises made in form of a deed i.e. reduced
into writing, signed and sealed by the contracting parties. Promises under seal
are legally binding even though they are gratuitous and depend on their format
in which they are expressed for their validity. Consideration is not necessary
under this contract.
2. Simple contracts
Unlike contracts made under seal, simple contracts may be made orally or in
writing` or deduced from conduct of the parties. These contracts are more
common.
At common law all simple contracts may be oral or written though under the
Contract Act, certain contracts must be in writing in order to be enforceable
The example of these contracts include contracts of transfer of interest in a
property from one person to another.
All simple contracts unlike contracts under seal must be supported by valuable
consideration in the absence. If a simple contract is not support, they will be
rendered void.
There are simple contracts that need not to be in writing but does not fall
under contract under seal. These contracts are:
i. Contract of guarantee.
ii. Articles of association
4
iii. Transfer of shares registered under companies Act.
4. In case of breach, right of action for contracts under seal have limited
period of enforceability which do not exceed 12 years from the date when
breach was made (the time the cause of action arose). However, actions for
breach of simple contracts must be brought within 6 years from the date
the breach was made (the time the cause of action arose).
5. A party to a contract under seal cannot deny or change the truth of the
statement given in the deed. A deed is conclusive against the parties
making them. Any attempt to alter may cause legal implications. A simple
contract written agreement however can be altered by the parties’
agreement.
3. Quasi contracts
5
Quasi contracts means resemblance to a contract. The rights and liabilities
under quasi-contracts do not arise from the facts on the agreement, but are
implied by law by virtue of a specific relationship between the parties. The law
imposes an obligation and allows an action to be brought on it as if it arose out
of agreement thought no actual agreement existed.
4. Contracts of record
Contracts of record are not real contracts. The parties to the contract enter into
agreement by compulsion of an event and without voluntary free will – to
perform the required obligations this contract is named contract of Record
because it is entered into court records. There are two forms of contract of
Record there are:-
o Judgment
o Recognizance
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS
For a valid contract there must be an offer made, and by one person and
accepted by another with contractual capacity furnishing valuable
6
consideration both parties must Charles communicate their offer and
acceptances.
OFFER
There are certain rules which govern offers the rules consider how an offer is
made, to when it is made and the nature of an offer.
An offer need not be made to a particular person but no contract can arise
unless the offer has been accepted by a particular person. An offer may be
made to a particular person or group of persons or it may be made to world at
large. An offer made to a particular person is known as specified offer and that
made to the general world it known as general offer.
7
A particular offer cannot be accepted by any one, without any previous
notifications. An offer must be made to the person one intends to contract with
and an offer made to one person cannot be accepted by another person with
intent that it creates a contract it must be accepted by the specific person to
whom it was made.
An offer made to the world at large can only be accepted by the person who are
willing to and go on to perform the terms of the offer. E.g. an advertisement of
reward for finding a lost item and returning it to the owner becomes a contract
when a person accepts it and performs the required act.
In the case of Carlil Vs. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893), PB 256 The
defendants made the following issues were missed by the defendant.
a) The offeror was too vague since no time limit was stipulated in which the
user was to contract influenza.
b) That the offer was an advertising “putt” and there was no intention to
create legal relations.
c) That it was an attempt to contract with the whole world and that this
was impossible in the English law.
d) The company also claimed that the plaintiff had not supplied any
consideration.
e) And that there had been no communication of acceptance.
a) It must surely have been the intention that the ball would protect its user
during the period of its use and since this covered the present case it
was not necessary to consider the time limit.
8
b) The deposit of £1000 at the bank was clear evidence of an intention to
pay claims.
c) The advertisement was an offer to the whole world and that by analogy
with the reward cases. It was possible to make an offer of this kind.
d) Using the inhalant three times a day for two weeks or more was
sufficient consideration. It was not necessary to consider its adequacy.
e) In contract of this kind, acceptance may be conduct i.e. performing the
given terms of the offer to communicate ones acceptance.
An offer must be made with an intention to stick to its terms. It must show a
present intent to contract on the part of the offer or the language used must
express a decision intent to contract and not to negotiate that are a reasonable
person would perceive the language, the surrounding a circumstances, and the
actions of the parties in determining whether the contact was formed.
The offer in the shop windows comes into existence when the customer enters
the shop and offers to buy the goods at price marked there by the shopkeeper.
The shopkeeper are not bound to sell the goods at these prices. He can either
accept the offer or refuse to sell to the customer. For goods put on shelves in a
self-service
9
shop or super market, the contract is made when cashier accept the offer to
buy what had been chosen.
Where sale is buy auction, the call for bids by auctioneer amounts to an
invitation to treat, while the bids that the people attending the auction make
are themselves the offers. The acceptance of the bid is completed by the fall of
the auctioneer hammer and thus there is no need to communicate it to the
higher to bidder(s). Thus, a bid is an offer which can be withdrawn at any time
before the fall of the hammer.
An offer must be definite or certain, not vague or illusory. The terms expressed
in the offer must be certain. Without certainty, the acceptance of the offer will
not give rise to an enforceable agreement the rule is qualified by the saying that
anything which is capable of being made certain to be regarded as certain.
The law will always uphold a contract whenever possible and will not find
uncertainty so as to frustrate the party’s intentions. However, it must to be
proved to the satisfaction of court that there is a contract in existence and just
not a mere agreement to contract in future.
10
10
Further, court stated that the word “subject to fluctuation” in the
circumstances means that the contract was dependent on the contract the seller
were making with their suppliers and if the letter raised their prices, a
corresponding increase would be passed to the buyer and that there was no
element of uncertainty in a contract of that kind.
Silence on the part of the offeree does not give rise to consent where the offer
has not been communicated work done for a person without his knowledge and
not at his request, does not make the person liable to pay for the service
rendered where an offer for reward is communicated or made for a lost item
and in response a person brings that item. He will have accepted the offer by
conduct and therefore is entitled to the reward.
In the case of Tailor Vs. Laird (1856) 25 L.J EX 329, the plaintiff was
engaged to command the defendant’s ship and conduct a group of explorers on
a Niger River. He performed his command and as finally helped to work the
vessel home though without the knowledge of the defendant. He claimed to be
remunerated for the service rendered. Court decided that the plaintiff could
not be paid because the defendant never had an option of accepting or refusing
the services while they were being rendered.
When an offer is accepted, the acceptance brings the offer to an end since it
becomes part of the agreement, i.e. the offer and the acceptance merges into a
contract. Where acceptance is completed it cannot be revoked simply because
11
11
a contract has already been concluded. While is the offer is rejected it ceases to
exist to and can only be received by the act of the offer.
In certain contracts the offer has time limit it is only open for a specific period
of time in order to give the offeree chance to think about and accept the offer in
that period. When acceptance is not made within the time, the offer expires.
Where there is no time limit, court will have determine what the reasonable
time in which the offer may be excepted to be accepted and it depends on the
facts and other circumstances of the case.
In Virji Kimji Vs. C.B Clutterick (1919), Court decide that the lapse of four
and half a months without communication of acceptance of the order was lapse
of a reasonable time sufficient to revoke the offer.
Where the offeror or offeree dies before acceptance, the offer terminates. An
offeree who decides to accept the offer after being informed of the offeror’s
death by personal representatives, the acceptance will not amount a contract.
ACCEPTANCE
12
12
An acceptance may be oral written of implied from the conduct of the parties.
In ever means chosen to accept the offer, it must correspond in every detail
with the terms of the offer; it must be made by or with the authority of the
offeree.
When accepting an offer. Motives of the offeree do not matter as long as the
person accepting had knowledge of the existence of the offer. This was stated in
the case of William Vs. Carwadine (1833) 4 C and P. 566 where court stated
that the plaintiff was not induced to give information because of the reward
offered, but by motives of spite and revenge. And court decide that
nevertheless, she was entitled to the reward, for she had seen the promised
reward published and had given the information required by the terms.
The intention to accept here is the intention to create a contract on the part of
the offeree. The offeree must decide to enter into a contract knowing that he or
she is bound to perform contractual obligation, failure of which the offeror may
sue him or her for breach of contract.
However, if the offeree merely inquire about the terms or accepts the terms of
offer while complaining the offer is not considered rejected. Where the offeree in
his acceptance proposes an additional term to the agreement which makes
material difference in the offer, the acceptance is not valid. If the proposed term
is immaterial to the offer the acceptance is valid.
13
13
3. Acceptance to be communicated
CONSIDERATION
In the case of Carrie V Misa (1875) L.R 10 EX 153, Justice Lush defined
consideration as some right, interest, profit or benefit acquired by one party or
some foreberrance, detriment loss or responsibility given suffered or
undertaken by the other.
14
14
In generally, a promise cannot be enforced against the person who made it
unless the persons to whom the promise was made has given up something of
legal value in exchange for the promise.
In effect, the requirement of consideration means that a promisee must pay the
price that promisor asked in order to gain the right to enforce the promisor’s
promise.
In the case Thorne Vs. Deas, apart cover of a sailing ship promised his co-
owner that he would insure the ship for and incoming voyage, but the co-
owners did not give anything in exchange for the promise except listening. The
part owner failed to fulfill his promise to insure the ship and when the ship lost
at sue the co-owners sued him for the promise. Court decided that the
promisor (part owner) was not liable to his co-owners for breach of the promise
to insure the ship, because his promise was purely gratuitous. He had neither
asked for nor received any thing in exchange for making the promise.
Therefore, it was unenforceable against him because it was not supported by
consideration.
Nature of Consideration
Example: In the contract of sale of goods where the terms states “cash with
order” the payment of cash to the attendant is the executing of the
Consideration.
Executory Consideration
This is a consideration which a person promised to give and is ready and
willing to give if the other party to the contract will perform his or her part.
Executory consideration consists of a promise to confirm some benefit or some
detriment in the future.
2. Consideration must move (be given) from the promisee though it must
not necessarily go to the promisor. A person wishing to enforce simple
contract must give the consideration asked for in return for the promise
that he or she wishes to enforce. A person enforcing a simple contract
cannot rely on the absence of consideration by merely showing that he has
received no benefit.
Consideration need not be adequate as long as the parties get what they
bargained for or what is satisfying to them. Whatever price or value the parties
in the contract accept as means of exchange between them is consideration
enough. As long as it can constitute or definite valuable consideration, the law
will not interfere with the contract for reasons of poor bargain between the
parties.
Consideration may be in the present i.e executed or in the future i.e. executory
but not pass. Pass consideration is an act or forbearance to act, sufficient to
17
support a contract but not done or excised in pursuance of a present contract
consideration given must be a related act and part of the same agreement.
The law considers the promise made subsequent to act to have been made on
moral grounds. If there is no other consideration for the later promise, it
becomes gratuitous and not enforceable.
In Roscorla Vs. Thomas, the plaintiff bought a horse from the defendant, after
the sale had been completed gave an undertaking that the horse was sound
and free from Vice. The horse was in fact a vicious horse, and the plaintiff sued
on the express warranty which he alleged had been given to him.
Court decided among others that if the warranty had been given at the time
of the sale, it would have been supported by consideration and therefore
actionable, but since it had been given after the sale had taken place, the
consideration for the warranty was past and no action could be brought upon
it. Further, no warranty would be implied from the circumstances of the sale.
There are however, exceptions to this rule. There are certain circumstances
where past act or consideration can amount to sufficient consideration. There
are:-
When promisor request for the past act before the agreement between them,
the earlier request turns what would have otherwise been past consideration –
to support (a subsequent) contract that follows.
The common law rule is that, payment of less than the sum which is owed to
the creditor is not sufficient consideration to support his or her promise not to
18
sue for payment of the remainder. However, the parties must agree that if such
part payment is made, it will be in discharge of the full liability owed and the
balance not to be demanded.
This was brought up in the case of Pinnel’s (1602) 5 Co. Rep. 1179 and
court decide that payment to a lesser sum on the day in satisfaction of a
greater on was no satisfaction of the whole. The ruling was supported later in
Foakes V Beer (1884) 9 App. Case 605 with certain exceptions added.
Where the debtor makes an earlier payment and the creditor receives a benefit
to which he or she is not entitled, it amounts to sufficient consideration to
support debtors promise to forego payment of remainder balance.
But if the debtor makes part payment after the due date, this is not sufficient
consideration for the debtor will do no more than he is bound to do, and the
creditor is already entitled to the full sum.
o Substituted Performance
Example: if the usual method of payment is in cash, and the creditor asked for
another means of payment other than cheque, it will be sufficient consideration
to support the promise to forego part payment.
where something of the value in the eye of the law is added to the part payment
in agreement with the creditor and in return for his promise not the sue, this
will be sufficient consideration to support the promise to forego the remainder
balance.
19
where something of the value in the eye of the law is added to the part payment
in agreement with the creditor and in return for his promise not the sue, this
will be sufficient consideration to support the promise to forego the remainder
balance.
Part payment of the amount owed, by a third party is at law a good discharge
of the full debt. A creditor who promises to release a debtor from the obligation
to pay the full amount in return for the part payment of the debt by a third
party cannot successfully claim the remainder from the debtor.
In Patel Bros Vs. H.D Hasmani, The defendant’s son owed 27,000/= to the
plaintiff. The defendant’s paid a cheques of 18,000/= to the plaintiff as
payment of the debt and for not suing the son.
CONTRACTURAL CAPACITY
Any legal person may have full capacity to enter into any kind of contract,
however, the law imposes restriction on who may conclude of contract and be
binding on him. The rationale of this law is to protect these categories of
person’s for reasons of their disabilities. When they contract, their contract
may either be void, voidable or unenforceable at law and not binding on them
by reasons of their status.
Persons with full capacities to contract may include; adults both Nationals and
Foreigners, Foreign Head of states and governments, their Ambassadors and
representatives and diplomatic staff.as such, persons incapable of contracting
at law are infants (minors), drunken persons, mentality disordered person and
corporation.
A. Infants or Minors
An infant or a minor is a person who is under the age of eighteen years and
who attains full age on the completion of his eighteenth year. Under the
provision of Contract Act, a minor is a person below 18 years. Below this age a
child lacks the intellectual maturity and experience to exercise sound judgment
about certain transactions. In that they lack bargaining power and therefore
need to be protected by the law.
However, minors still can make valid contracts. Their age may not stop them
from making contracts at all. There are certain contracts that minors may
enter into and be bound. However, the basic rule is that such contracts when
entered into with a minor, must be enforceable by the minor but not against
them
These are contracts which are not voidable at the option of the infant. They are
binding on them because they are for the benefit of the infant and thus, they
are to pay reasonable price for the necessaries. Sales of Goods Act, provides
that necessaries sold and delivered to an infant or minor or any person with
mental incapacity or drunken person must be sold at a reasonable price.
The Act also defines necessaries as goods suitable to the condition in life of
such infant or minor or other person and to his actual requirements at the
time of sale and delivery.
At law, the term necessaries is wider than its usual meaning of food and
clothing and it varied from infant to another depending on their health, age
and status. However, basic needs are necessaries to all.
Once the goods or service in questions are decided to be necessaries, the infant
will be compelled to pay a reasonable price and not the price negotiated and
agreed upon.
Where the goods are not delivered even if they are necessaries, the infant shall
not be liable, if the infant changed the mind before delivery.
There are certain things which are out of range of necessaries for an infant of a
peasant but considered necessaries for an infant of rich parent’s e.g. A holiday
on resort, expensive suit etc.
If the child status cannot afford, and he or she enters into such contract, it will
not be binding. While for a rich child, it will be binding because the child need
to be maintained in the style of living to which he or she is accustomed to.
In Nash V Inman (1908), the plaintiff a tailor sent his agent to the defendant
an under graduate infant at Trinity College, Cambridge because he heard that
he was spending his money freely and might be the sort of man who would be
interested in high – class clothing. When the agent visited the defendant, he
ordered to be supplied with various articles of clothing to the large amount.
The clothes included eleven fancy waistcoats and it was all supplied. The
plaintiff sued the infant for the price of the clothes evidence showed that the
22
defendant’s father was in a good position being an architect with a town and
country house and could be said that the clothes supplied were suitable to the
defendant’s position in life. The father, however, proved that the defendant was
adequately supplied with such clothes the plaintiff delivered. Court decided
that the defendant cannot be liable for the price of the clothes because by
stock of his clothes the supplied clothes were not necessaries.
In Chappel Vs. Copper (1844), the plaintiff sought to recover the cost of a
funeral carried out at the request of an infant widow for her husband. Court
decided that the infant must pay for the lavish services rendered at her
husband funeral because they were necessary to her station in life. Court
further added that, if a lavish funeral had been provided for a family of
humble means and social position, it is suggested that it would have not been
suitable to the station in life of the family and therefore not constituting
necessaries.
A supplier who claims the goods supplied or services rendered are necessary
must, prove it at law that they were necessary for infant station in life.
At common law, the rule is that a contract which is entirely for the infants
benefits is binding on him irrespective of the circumstance as to the infant’s
interest. This rule does not apply to trading contracts, however beneficial such
contracts are for the child.
In Conwell Vs. Neil, An infant who was hay and Straw dealer entered an
agreement to consign and deliver Hay to the plaintiff. He later failed to deliver
the hay. Court decided that the contract was a trading contract and so could
not be for necessaries. The infant was therefore not bound to repay the price
for hay be failed to deliver.
A. Contracts voidable by minor
Voidable contracts on an infant are those contracts which are valid and inding
on an infant unless and until avoided by the infant while he is still an infant or
immediately after he has become an adult.
And where performance has been made, the repudiation of the contract serves
only to stop future duty but not to recover money paid already in performance
of the contract.
Under the Contracts Act, the following contracts are void against infants:-
24
An infant who becomes an adult cannot be good for contracts entered into and
concluded while an infant even if, he rectifies the contract in adulthood
property bought and sold by an infant under void contracts cannot give the
buyer any good title after and the law of equity cannot grant any remedy of
specific performance.
Where an infant falsely states his age, the adult in contract with cannot sue for
damages in an action for fraud, because the law consider this as indirect
approach to enforcing a void contract.
A person may be absolutely drunk and without any memory at the time he or
she enters into a contract so that he or she is completely unable to understand
the nature of the thing he is doing. If one party to the contract is aware that
the other was too drunk to appreciate the nature of his or her act, the contract
will be voidable at the drunken person’s option. The same applies to contracts
entered into by mentally unsound person.
However, when contracts are made when a person is not completely drunk or
in during lucid interval of insanity, then the contracts are binding. The same
applies when a contract made in complete insanity or drunken off is rectified
when the person regains consciousness.
In such circumstances, the purchaser of the property gets good title without
defect. These categories of person are only liable to pay reasonable price for
goods supplied to them and anything not necessaries within the meaning of the
law cannot be enforceable.
In Mathew Vs. Baxter (1873) the defendant while drunk, agreed at an auction
sale to purchase from the plaintiff certain house and land. Afterwards, when
sober he affirmed the contract and then repeated the bargain. When sued on
25
the contract, he pleaded that he was drunk at the time when he made it, and
to the plaintiff’s knowledge. Court decided that although he had once an
option in the matter and might and might have not avoided the contract, he
was now bound by his affirmation of contract.
CORPORATIONS
TERMS OF CONTRACT
Terms of a contract may express by parties of implied by the law before the
contract was concluded.
A. Implied terms
Terms not included in the contract by the parties may be implied by law as
being part of the parties’ agreement. However, it must not deviate from the
expressed terms of the contract.
The intention to imply term were necessary is that the law consider that parties
might have forgotten or experience mistake of drafting and in which case the
terms must be implied to give the contract meaning.
26
The law will only imply terms if it is not necessary or if it is obvious between
the parties. To imply a term, the law looks at agreement between the parties
from the view point of a reasonable man.
o Implied term as to title, where the seller has alright to sell the goods
and will have that right even till the conclusion of the contract.
o Implied warranty that the buyer shall enjoy quiet possession of the
goods.
o Implied warranty that the goods bought is free from any offer or interest
attached to it other than what the buyer is buying.
p Implied conditions as to quality and fitness
If the buyer relies on the seller’s skills and judgment and the seller is aware of
this, then is an implied condition that the goods are of merchantable quality
and fit for the purpose is applied.
Sale by sample
Expressed terms of a contract can be divided again into two, conditions and
warranties conditional terms are fundamental terms whose breach destroys the
main existence of the contract, while breach of warranty is breach of minor
term repressible by an action for damages.
27
Exemption or Limitation clauses
These are terms which are put in a contract in order to limit liability of a party
in certain circumstances. These terms are accepted at law but must be
communicated to the other party of the contract.
The plaintiff signed without reading the clause and sued in respect of
unsatisfactory nature of the machine supplied. Court decided that the clause
was binding on her although the defendant made no attempt to neither read
the document to her nor call her attention to the clause.
o If the signer can prove that he was induced to sign the document
containing the clause.
28
If the document does not require signing, the following must have been done
for before a person signing may be bound by exemption clause:-
o The document containing the clause forms a greater part of the contracts
and does not just act as evidence.
o Reasonable care was taken to bring the exemption clause into the notice
of the offeree i.e. clearly written in conspicuous position to be read by the
offeree.
o Notice must have been given at the time of contracting of the goods so as
to protect the buyer from liability to pay price.
DISCHARGE OF A CONTRACT
A contract entered into between two parties will be discharged, if the obligation
created by it becomes no longer binding on them. Discharge of a contract
means that the parties are released from their mutual obligations. The
promisor’s duty to perform ceases. Discharge of a contract takes place in
several ways:-
1. Discharge by agreement
Parties to a contract can by a mutual agreement between them bring the
contract to an end. When the contract is executor only an agreement to end
the contract is binding since performance was in the future time. Where a
contract has been fully executed or partly, a simple agreement cannot put it
to an end, there has to be consideration given for the promise to end it i.e.
29
some payment for what has been done or remainder of the contract unless
the contract is under seal.
2. Discharge by performance
Parties to a contract who have performed their obligation to each other till
the end as agreed will be discharge from further liability. Where
performance of major terms has been done or part performance of a
contract, the party will be entitled to reasonable payment for what he or she
has done, the same applies to where the contract is divisible or severable
and when performance was prevented by the promise.
3. Payment of a sum of money which is owed under the contract in full and
complete, discharge the debt. However, payment of a lesser sum can’t
discharge debt of a greater sum except where additional consideration is
given, payment is by 3rd party, payment is in a substitutive mode of
payment or done earlier than the due date at the request of the creditor.
5. Impossibility to performance
Where a contract subsequently becomes impossible to perform, it is
considered trust rated. Not all kinds of hindrance of a contract impossible
or discharge of duty of perform. Thus, the events that tend to discharge a
contract include sickness, accident, war considered as an act of God) and
Legislation.
6. Breach of contract by a party discharge the contract and the aggrieved party
may bring actions in respect of the breach.
7. Provision of the law e.g.